Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a highway matter. Part of the complaint is late and it was Mr X’s choice to accept the Council’s offer to clarify highway rights over ‘his’ land. If Mr X did not sign the agreement and claims trespass it would be reasonable for him to take the matter to court.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council placed a road sign on his land despite his contention it was not part of the public highway. He also complains the Council colluded with the District Valuer to reduce the value of his land so it could purchase it.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I reviewed Mr X’s complaint and his correspondence with the Council about the matter. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and invited his comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. The Council erected a road sign on a strip of land which runs alongside the road several years ago. Mr X complained the land was his and the Council had no right to put anything on it. The Council disputed this and said the land was dedicated highway land and had been used as such for at least the last 20 years. Mr X disagrees with this.
7. More recently, the Council informed Mr X of its intention to put a pedestrian footway and cycle path on the land. Mr X continued to dispute the Council’s right to do so, so the Council agreed to pay him to resolve the matter and allow it to dedicate the land as part of the public highway. Mr X did not agree to the Council’s offer so the Council instructed the District Valuer to value the land. They agreed with the Council’s offer, however Mr X suggests there was a conflict of interest. The Council considered making a Compulsory Purchase Order to buy the land but given the costs involved it significantly increased its offer and Mr X accepted it. It sent him a draft copy of the Deed of Dedication, which Mr X agreed to, but did not send him a copy of the final Deed until much later. Mr X says this denied him the opportunity to seek legal advice on the document.
8. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. Mr X’s concern about the placement of the sign on his land dates back to more than five years before his complaint to the Ombudsman; any complaint about it is therefore late. Mr X says he had to look at the sign for this length of time but this is not a significant injustice for which we would recommend a remedy. If Mr X felt the Council had no authority to place the sign on his land he could have taken court action at the time.
9. The Council maintains its position that the verge has been part of the highway for more than 20 years and its offer to Mr X proposed to clarify this and resolve any dispute that may arise. Mr X did not have to accept it but he decided he would. It is unclear if Mr X signed the final Deed of Dedication but it he did, this was his choice. If he did not, and as the Council started work the following day, he may wish to seek legal advice about a claim in trespass.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X’s concerns about the Council’s road sign are late and it is unlikely we could say its handling of the Deed of Dedication caused Mr X significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman